What lossy format should I convert my .FLAC into?, What lossy format has the high quality and wide acceptance? Options

[Yingerman]

Hey everybody! I've been browsing Hydrogen Audio for awhile now, and I figured I'd become an official member.

I've ripped quite a few CDs, using EAC, into lossless .WAV and .FLAC audio formats, but sadly my HDD just can't take it anymore! Those formats also don't like to work with my Portable Music Player. I'd like to convert my lossless files into a compressed lossy format, but I can't decide which one.

From my research, AAC (.AAC, .MP4, .M4A) seems like it may be a great choice. It is a widely accepted format with better quality than .MP3 while still maintaining a compressed file size. If you guys think AAC is the way to go, I'd also like to know what your opinions are on bitrates. !92? 256? or 320? If you think I should go with another format, please let me know!

Thanks everyone!

This post has been edited by Yingerman: Jul 2 2012, 02:24

[JJZolx]

What do you mean your HDD "just can't take it any more"? If you're running out of room, buy some more hard drive space. It's cheap. And make sure you're backing it all up, or else look forward to some day starting all over from scratch.

You should start by compressing anything you have stored in WAV format to FLAC.

The most universal lossy format is probably still MP3, so I'd stick with that if compatibility is a concern. Assuming you're not actually talking about replacing a perfectly good FLAC library with one encoded in AAC or MP3, do some listening tests to find the lowest bitrate that you find to be acceptable on the portable players. Encode using LAME VBR if all of your players can play it ok, which any newer player should.

This post has been edited by JJZolx: Jul 2 2012, 02:38

[eahm]

I archive in FLAC and convert to AAC True VBR q82 with foobar2000 and qaac. I am the happiest I've ever been. I performed few ABX test and this bitrate (~165Kbps) is transparent to me, also remember you can go lower than MP3 with AAC.

I know people that transcode to 96Kbps for portable use and they are happy. You need to be happy, do some ABX test, you will be surprised how low you can go with AAC.

I've never liked the space MP3s need/take, V0, V2, even V4 take too much for a lossy, portable use. I really enjoy AAC, like a little baby.

PS
Also my portable player is Apple.

This post has been edited by eahm: Jul 2 2012, 07:50

[LithosZA]

AAC is a good choice as long as you use Apple's AAC Encoder or Nero AAC Encoder.
Vorbis is also a good choice if your portable supports the format.

[Porcus]

Your initial posting indicates that you want to get rid of your FLACs? (Why, by the way, use WAV at all?)

If you want to keep lossless copies, then transcode to whatever you would like to experiment with. You might be surprised at how good mp3 @ kb/s plays on your portable.

If you want to throw away your losslesses ... now that's a different story, because you cannot revert the decision. You can also not expect to transcode further with good results. (I.e., if you choose a high bitrate at home and wish to make a lower-bitrate copy for your portable player, it might sound like a bad Youtube video. Literally. That's what is wrong with those.)

I would have gone mp3, as it is the most widely supported format. (The're never gonna get rid of that!)

[bandpass]

I try to avoid mp3 as gapless playback support is poor—nothing grates more than having a beautifully crafted segue literally torn apart as you listen. If limited to mp3, I often have to code several tracks as a single mp3 file to get round the problem—annoying!

[db1989]

I've ripped quite a few CDs, using EAC, into lossless .WAV and .FLAC audio formats

What: both?

but sadly my HDD just can't take it anymore!

Keeping two lossless copies containing the exact same audio is a sure-fire way to burn HD space, yes.

[Yingerman]

Thanks for all the advice guys!

I can get a pretty cheap external HDD to keep all of the lossless files archived. I'll convert my .WAVs to .FLAC.

I don't want to use .MP3 because it sounds pretty flat to me compared to AAC. Plus, AAC seems to be much smaller in size!

I did a few tests with AAC to see what one I liked best, and I think 192kbps sounds just fine. I'm a bit confused by the whole format though. When I make an AAC at only 128kbps, my file size is about 3.06MB, and at 320kbps, my file size was only 3.68MB. Could someone please explain that to me?

[db1989]

I don't want to use .MP3 because it sounds pretty flat to me compared to AAC.

Here’s the bit where I have to ask whether you ABXed that. Otherwise, it’s not a valid thing to say.

Plus, AAC seems to be much smaller in size!

Only if you choose a quality setting that targets a lower bit rate.

I'm a bit confused by the whole format though. When I make an AAC at only 128kbps, my file size is about 3.06MB, and at 320kbps, my file size was only 3.68MB. Could someone please explain that to me?

For anyone to be able to explain anything, you will have to provide more (any) information. Which encoder? Which two settings? CBR? VBR? ABR? And so on.

[yourlord]

I'll add to the chorus that you should consider keeping the FLAC files as those can later be transcoded to any lossy format you need in the future with no generational loss problems.

If you are determined to ditch FLAC, the only real option is then mp3 as EVERYTHING on the planet will play it. No other format can claim that crown. If you choose to archive in a lossy format then further transcoding should be avoided at all costs so the only way to guarantee your library will play on any device is to archive in the format most widely supported, hence mp3.

I prefer Ogg Vorbis for lossy encoding, but hardware support is spotty. Since my archive is FLAC that support doesn't matter as much since I can encode to Ogg Vorbis on devices that support it, mp3 on devices that only support that, etc.

I won't address the mp3 sounding flat comment other than to say with a modern encoder such as lame at a reasonably high quality level (V2 or better), you're experiencing placebo. I'd wager good money you couldn't ABX it against a lossless copy.

[Vietwoojagig]

I did a few tests with AAC to see what one I liked best, and I think 192kbps sounds just fine. I'm a bit confused by the whole format though. When I make an AAC at only 128kbps, my file size is about 3.06MB, and at 320kbps, my file size was only 3.68MB. Could someone please explain that to me?

Choose 192 if you like it. For me 160 was already sufficient. And on my iPod, i use only 128. But if you can sleep better chose 192.
I assume that both files contain cover art. If you remove it from both, the ratio should be approx. 1:2.5

[LithosZA]

If you are determined to ditch FLAC, the only real option is then mp3 as EVERYTHING on the planet will play it. No other format can claim that crown. If you choose to archive in a lossy format then further transcoding should be avoided at all costs so the only way to guarantee your library will play on any device is to archive in the format most widely supported, hence mp3.

Are there still players that can't play AAC? Way back in 2005 most players could play AAC.

[saratoga]

Way back in 2005 most players could play AAC.

Other then iPods, which 2005 players are you thinking of?

[pdq]

I just bought a Sansa Clip Plus that doesn't support AAC (Supports MP3, WMA, secure WMA, Audible, Ogg Vorbis, FLAC, plus audio books and podcasts).

[LithosZA]

I just bought a Sansa Clip Plus that doesn't support AAC (Supports MP3, WMA, secure WMA, Audible, Ogg Vorbis, FLAC, plus audio books and podcasts).

Woops, my bad.

[halb27]

You can install the alternative Rockbox firmware (highly recommended) on the Clip+ and enjoy AAC.

This post has been edited by halb27: Jul 2 2012, 20:19

[yourlord]

Are there still players that can't play AAC? Way back in 2005 most players could play AAC.

In my case all my players will play AAC except one, and that's my car stereo which only supports mp3. My car stereo has a USB port where a 16GB thumb drive is installed full of as much of my library in mp3 format as will fit.

Everything else I own will play Vorbis, so the rest of the players are loaded with Vorbis files.

This post has been edited by yourlord: Jul 2 2012, 20:35

[pdq]

You can install the alternative Rockbox firmware (highly recommended) on the Clip+ and enjoy AAC.

Micro SD cards have become really cheap, so I just use FLAC, which is what I also listen to on my PC. That way I have only one version of everything.

[probedb]

In my case all my players will play AAC except one, and that's my car stereo which only supports mp3. My car stereo has a USB port where a 16GB thumb drive is installed full of as much of my library in mp3 format as will fit.

Everything else I own will play Vorbis, so the rest of the players are loaded with Vorbis files.

I still don't understand why car stereos are still so far behind in playing back audio like this. Mine can't even sort files alphabetically if they're more than 32 characters in length!

[halb27]

There seems to be a tendency that new car stereos have an AUX input nowadays. Great thing for plugging in your favorite music player for the purpose (which probably is your smartphone one of these days).

[birdie]

Don't! Buy a new HDD, burn your audio on DVD/BD disks.

[db1989]

What about the concerns of longevity associated with such media? Granted, HDs and the like are not immune to failure, either, but it’s a lot easier to buy a new disc somewhere in the terabytes and copy over everything than it would be to burn another load of discs at a mere (in relative terms) 4.7–128 GB each.

[pdq]

In either case the key is to have multiple copies, preferably using differing technologies.

[db1989]

Of course! I just don’t think optical media have much potential as a means of archival. This applies especially to those with large collections or more concerns about data loss.

I’d go with (what I think is) most others’ usual recommendation of multiple redundant copies of the archive, possibly in more than one location.

[pdq]

And let's not forget audiosafe